Radagast the Brown

[DáinIronfoot]

That's...crazy.

And then I guess it's increased each time you play Radagast, too?

I'm off to design a badly broken Frodo/Radagast only deck with lots of Sent Back and just move as much as possible, add as little other twilight as possible, and run to the end of the game in like two or three turns.

Seriously, that's messed up. Bad form, Decipher.

[HawkeyeSPF]

That's just how it is man. Look through decks from all the World's tournaments after Reflections came out (if you can find them that is - try decktech.net) - almost every one of them packed Radagast for this reason. Drop Rad at 6, let him die at 7 so you don't  add more twilight than you need to when you move to 8 and 9.

[Kralik]

So maybe I'm just being picky, but the "for a turn" wording isn't significant?

[TheJord]

It is, but remember that "turn" encompasses all the moves you make, be it 1, 2, 3 or more moves.

[Elessar's Socks]

Doesn't seem so, Kralik--wish I could give you a better answer why the wording is inconsistent. But it's the way I've consistently seen it ruled; besides the ruling from Merrick that TheJord brought up, here's one from Bib on the same issue.

Once you modify the move limit, it counts as modifying the move limit for a turn (whether the card uses "for this turn" or not). Maybe Decipher thought "The move limit is +1 for this turn" on Radagast might cause confusion about whether it's a one-turn only deal, because as a companion he'll stick around (or apparently not in Worlds), and he also lacks a trigger. I dunno, sort of pulled that explanation out of my rear just now.

I'm off to design a badly broken Frodo/Radagast only deck with lots of Sent Back and just move as much as possible, add as little other twilight as possible, and run to the end of the game in like two or three turns.

If you build it, I will want to see it.

[NappyKorn]

Cool that makes my Wizard Choke Deck even better

[AgentDrake]

IIRC, the purpose of that whole "if the move limit is modified for a turn...." clarification in the first place was specifically because of the confusion over Radagast, and was to say that the move limit change sticks around, and can add up. Poorly worded, and, IMO, should've been ruled the other way, but oh well.

[Kralik]

Once you modify the move limit, it counts as modifying the move limit for a turn (whether the card uses "for this turn" or not). Maybe Decipher thought "The move limit is +1 for this turn" on Radagast might cause confusion about whether it's a one-turn only deal, because as a companion he'll stick around (or apparently not in Worlds), and he also lacks a trigger. I dunno, sort of pulled that explanation out of my rear just now.

It just seems wrong! Ah, well. Let's see those decks!

[Shieldmaiden]

Very interesting debate, I'm watching this with great interest.  I can see the arguments for both sides.  And now I'm going to add fuel to the fire.    

So, you play Radagast, and the move limit is increased by 1.  You move twice, then Radagast is killed!  Do you get to move again?  When I've played, the answer has been no, but now that I'm reading this thread, I'm not sure about that anymore.   

[TheJord]

If you play Radagast and move, then he dies, you can still move the amount that Radagast had modified the move limit to.

Radagast is played - move limit +1
Radagast dies        - move limit still +1 for that turn, the next fellowship phase it will return to normal

This rule applies universally. Another situation would be Theoden, The Renowned with Theodred out. The move limit is +1 when Theoden can spot Theodred. If either die, the move limit is still +1 for that turn. Again, Riding Like The Wind is out, gets discarded, its move limit bonus applies until the end of the turn.

Silly I know, but since when did Decipher make sense?

[Elessar's Socks]

I would say I agree with TheJord, except we're in danger of forming a loop. *LOL* (But I believe that's the correct interpretation of the rule.)

The reason might have to do with Bree Gate and Rivendell Waterfall from all the way back in the FotR set. If the modification doesn't stick, you'll lose the bonus once you move from those sites.

Agreed the rule is hardly intuitive, though.

[Kralik]

The reason might have to do with Bree Gate and Rivendell Waterfall from all the way back in the FotR set. If the modification doesn't stick, you'll lose the bonus once you move from those sites.

Maybe... though they still say explicitly, "for this turn." That's why I was wondering if it still works the same way when that exact wording is not used.

[DáinIronfoot]

The reason might have to do with Bree Gate and Rivendell Waterfall from all the way back in the FotR set. If the modification doesn't stick, you'll lose the bonus once you move from those sites.

Maybe... though they still say explicitly, "for this turn." That's why I was wondering if it still works the same way when that exact wording is not used.

Ditto. They seem to be two different things.

Of course, "take control of a site" and "control a site" seem like two different things but apparently are interchangeable since the release of Treachery & Deceit, so....

Oh, and I wasn't ACTUALLY going to design a deck around Frodo and Radagast, but I suppose I could....

[Malachi]

Looks like this new (old) CRD's resolves the issue.

If you play a second copy of Radagast in the same
turn, the move limit is an additional +1.

[DáinIronfoot]

This is why we need a player committee...to get rid of ridiculous rulings like this one.